Ming-Zhu Liu

Purpose To retrospectively investigate the safety and efficacy of radiotherapy combined with chemotherapy for recurrent metastatic renal pelvic and ureteral carcinoma. Methods 109 patients were enrolled in this study, including 44 patients in the radiochemotherapy group and 65 patients in the chemotherapy group. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance the baseline characteristics of the two groups by 1:1 matching. Kaplan–Meier method was used to calculate PFS and OS. Cox regression model was used for multivariate analysis. The side effects were evaluated by CTCAE v5.0 Results The median follow-up time was 14.5 months. Multivariate analysis showed that radiotherapy was a good independent prognostic factor for OS (HR: 0.327, 95% CI 0.157–0.680, P = 0.003). After matching, there were 40 patients in both groups, and the median PFS and OS in the radiochemotherapy group were longer than those in the chemotherapy group (PFS: 10.4 vs. 6.7 months, P = 0.035; OS: 43.5 vs. 18.8 months, P < 0.001). In addition, in the radiochemotherapy group, patients treated with radiotherapy before first-line chemotherapy failure had a longer PFS than those treated with radiotherapy after chemotherapy failure (median PFS: 15.7 vs. 6 months, P = 0.003). There was no significant difference in the incidence of grade 3–4 toxicities between the two groups (52.3% vs. 50.8%, P = 0.878). Conclusion For patients with recurrent metastatic renal pelvic and ureteral carcinoma, radiotherapy combined with chemotherapy is well tolerable and expected to bring long-term survival benefits, and the benefits of early interventional radiotherapy may be more obvious.

Prostate cancer (PCa) is a widespread malignancy with global significance, which substantially affects cancer-related mortality. Its spectrum varies widely, from slow-progressing cases to aggressive or even lethal forms. Effective patient stratification into risk groups is crucial to therapeutic decisions and clinical trials. This review examines a wide range of diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers, several of which are integrated into clinical guidelines, such as the PHI, the 4K score, PCA3, Decipher, and Prolaris. It also explores the emergence of novel biomarkers supported by robust preclinical evidence, including urinary miRNAs and isoprostanes. Genetic alterations frequently identified in PCa, including BRCA1/BRCA2, ETS gene fusions, and AR changes, are also discussed, offering insights into risk assessment and precision treatment strategies. By evaluating the latest developments and applications of PCa biomarkers, this review contributes to an enhanced understanding of their role in disease management.

Background: Prostate cancer is a significant clinical issue, particularly for high Gleason score (GS) malignancy patients. Our study aimed to engineer and validate a risk model based on the profiles of high-GS PCa patients for early identification and the prediction of prognosis. Methods: We conducted differential gene expression analysis on patient samples from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and enriched our understanding of gene functions. Using the least absolute selection and shrinkage operator (LASSO) regression, we established a risk model and validated it using an independent dataset from the International Cancer Genome Consortium (ICGC). Clinical variables were incorporated into a nomogram to predict overall survival (OS), and machine learning was used to explore the risk factor characteristics’ impact on PCa prognosis. Our prognostic model was confirmed using various databases, including single-cell RNA-sequencing datasets (scRNA-seq), the Cancer Cell Line Encyclopedia (CCLE), PCa cell lines, and tumor tissues. Results: We identified 83 differentially expressed genes (DEGs). Furthermore, WASIR1, KRTAP5-1, TLX1, KIF4A, and IQGAP3 were determined to be significant risk factors for OS and progression-free survival (PFS). Based on these five risk factors, we developed a risk model and nomogram for predicting OS and PFS, with a C-index of 0.823 (95% CI, 0.766–0.881) and a 10-year area under the curve (AUC) value of 0.788 (95% CI, 0.633–0.943). Additionally, the 3-year AUC was 0.759 when validating using ICGC. KRTAP5-1 and WASIR1 were found to be the most influential prognosis factors when using the optimized machine learning model. Finally, the established model was interrelated with immune cell infiltration, and the signals were found to be differentially expressed in PCa cells when using scRNA-seq datasets and tissues. Conclusions: We engineered an original and novel prognostic model based on five gene signatures through TCGA and machine learning, providing new insights into the risk of scarification and survival prediction for PCa patients in clinical practice.

Prostate cancer (PCa) is a critical global public health issue with its incidence on the rise. Radiation therapy holds a primary role in PCa treatment; however, radiation resistance has become increasingly challenging as we uncover more about PCa’s pathogenesis. Our review aims to investigate the multifaceted mechanisms underlying radiation therapy resistance in PCa. Specifically, we will examine how various factors, such as cell cycle regulation, DNA damage repair, hypoxic conditions, oxidative stress, testosterone levels, epithelial–mesenchymal transition, and tumor stem cells, contribute to radiation therapy resistance. By exploring these mechanisms, we hope to offer new insights and directions towards overcoming the challenges of radiation therapy resistance in PCa. This can also provide a theoretical basis for the clinical application of novel ultra-high-dose-rate (FLASH) radiotherapy in the era of PCa.

Background: Stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) is one of the treatment options for oligometastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) but is limited by a lack of data to evaluate high-dose SABR to all/multiple sites. Objective: This study retrospectively investigated the efficacy and prognostic factors of high-dose SABR for oligometastatic RCC patients. Design, setting, and participants: Patients with oligometastatic RCC on systemic therapy were retrospectively collected. Intervention(s): All patients were treated with SABR (40–50 Gy/5 fractions) for small tumors or partial-SABR (tumor center boosted with 6–8 Gy/3–5 fractions with 50–60 Gy/20–25 fractions to the whole tumor volume) for bulky tumors or tumors adjacent to critical organs. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated. Results and limitations: In total, 35 patients were enrolled, of which 88.5% had intermediate- or high-risk disease, with 60% on second- to fourth-line systemic therapy. The median follow-up time was 17 months. The median PFS and OS times were 11.3 and 29.7 months, respectively. Univariate analysis showed that an OS benefit was found in patients who received radiation before tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) failure (p = 0.006) and where there was a short time interval (p = 0.046). Similar results were also found in PFS in patients who received radiation before TKI failure (p = 0.049) or within eight months (p = 0.047). There were certain differences in PFS (p = 0.033) between patients receiving radiotherapy with all lesions and those with selected tumors. In multivariate analysis, OS benefits were found in patients who received radiotherapy before TKI failure (p = 0.028). The limitations of this study include its retrospective design and the small patient cohort. Conclusions: The early use of high-dose SABR to multi-lesions may improve survival. Partial-SABR for bulky lesions close to critical organs could be safely and effectively applied under certain circumstances.

Radiation therapy for nonmetastatic medically inoperable upper-tract urothelial carcinoma Ming-Zhu Liu, Xian-Shu Gao, Shang-Bin Qin, Xiao-Ying Li, Ming-Wei Ma, Mu Xie, Feng Lyu, Dian Wang

Purpose: To define the clinical characteristics and prognostic value of pre‐retreatment plasma Epstein‐Barr virus (EBV) DNA, we investigated EBV status in locoregional recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma (lrNPC) patients.Methods: Between April 2008 and August 2016, the data of patients with nonmetastatic lrNPC were retrospectively reviewed. The survival indexes of patients between different pre‐retreatment EBV status groups were compared.Results: A total of 401 patients with nonmetastatic lrNPC were enrolled, and 197 (49.1%) patients had detectable pre‐retreatment plasma EBV DNA. Treatment included radiotherapy alone (n = 37 patients), surgery alone (n = 105), radiotherapy (n = 208), surgery combined with radiotherapy (n = 20), chemotherapy and targeted therapy (n = 31). Median follow‐up was 32 months. The 3‐year locoregional relapse‐free survival (LRRFS), distant metastasis‐free survival (DMFS), and overall survival (OS) rates for the entire cohort were 64.8%, 89.4%, and 58.8%, respectively. The estimated 3‐year LRRFS, DMFS, and OS rates for the pre EBV‐positive group vs the pre EBV‐negative group were 54.2% vs 75.0% (P < 0.001), 86.6% vs 91.9% (P = 0.05), 51.6% vs 65.9% (P = 0.01), respectively. Among patients in the clinical stage rI/II, there were 17 patients in the radiotherapy alone group and 49 patients in the surgery alone group. And there was no significant difference in overall survival between radiotherapy and surgery, even among the different pre‐EBV statuses (P > 0.05). In terms of long‐term toxic and side effects, the incidence of radioactive temporal lobe injury in the radiotherapy group was higher than that in the surgery group (35.3% vs 8.2%, P < 0.001), and no statistically significant difference was found in other long‐term toxic and side effects.Conclusions: The positive rate of pre‐retreatment plasma EBV DNA in lrNPC is lower than primary NPC. The prognosis of EBV DNA negative group is better than positive group. For locally early‐stage lrNPC, regardless of EBV DNA status, radiotherapy and surgery are available options and both can achieve better long‐term survival.